Article #386-2 | Gutenberg Articles

Excerpt

Excerpt from Virginibus Puerisque, and Other Papers, by Robert Louis Stevenson

WITH the single exception of Falstaff, all Shakespeare’s characters are
what we call marrying men. Mercutio, as he was own cousin to Benedick
and Biron, would have come to the same end in the long run. Even Iago
had a wife, and, what is far stranger, he was jealous. People like
Jacques and the Fool in Lear, although we can hardly imagine they would
ever marry, kept single out of a cynical humour or for a broken heart,
and not, as we do nowadays, from a spirit of incredulity and preference
for the single state. For that matter, if you turn to George Sand’s
French version of As You Like It (and I think I can promise you will
like it but little), you will find Jacques marries Celia just as Orlando
marries Rosalind.

At least there seems to have been much less hesitation over marriage in
Shakespeare’s days; and what hesitation there was was of a laughing sort,
and not much more serious, one way or the other, than that of Panurge.
In modern comedies the heroes are mostly of Benedick’s way of thinking,
but twice as much in earnest, and not one quarter so confident. And I
take this diffidence as a proof of how sincere their terror is. They
know they are only human after all; they know what gins and pitfalls lie
about their feet; and how the shadow of matrimony waits, resolute and
awful, at the cross-roads. They would wish to keep their liberty; but if
that may not be, why, God’s will be done! “What, are you afraid of
marriage?” asks Cécile, in Maître Guerin. “Oh, mon Dieu, non!” replies
Arthur; “I should take chloroform.” They look forward to marriage much
in the same way as they prepare themselves for death: each seems
inevitable; each is a great Perhaps, and a leap into the dark, for which,
when a man is in the blue devils, he has specially to harden his heart.
That splendid scoundrel, Maxime de Trailles, took the news of marriages
much as an old man hears the deaths of his contemporaries. “C’est
désespérant,” he cried, throwing himself down in the arm-chair at Madame
Schontz’s; “c’est désespérant, nous nous marions tous!” Every marriage
was like another gray hair on his head; and the jolly church bells seemed
to taunt him with his fifty years and fair round belly.

Explanation

Robert Louis Stevenson’s Virginibus Puerisque (1881) is a collection of essays exploring themes of youth, love, marriage, and the contrasts between past and present attitudes toward romance and commitment. The title, Latin for "For Maidens and Youths," reflects Stevenson’s focus on the idealism and anxieties of young people navigating adulthood. The excerpt you’ve provided—from the first essay in the collection—examines shifting cultural perspectives on marriage, particularly the growing hesitation and fear surrounding it in the modern (19th-century) era compared to the more lighthearted or resigned attitudes in Shakespeare’s time.

Detailed Explanation of the Excerpt

1. Context and Central Argument

Stevenson begins by contrasting Shakespearean attitudes toward marriage with those of his own time (the late 19th century). His central claim is that while Shakespeare’s characters—even the most cynical or roguish—ultimately accept marriage as a natural (if sometimes comedic) part of life, modern men (and women) approach it with dread, skepticism, and existential fear. The essay reflects broader Victorian anxieties about social change, individualism, and the declining influence of tradition.

Key observations:

Shakespeare’s characters marry (or are expected to): Even figures like Iago (a villain) or Jacques (a melancholic philosopher) are not principled bachelors—they either have wives or avoid marriage for personal, not ideological, reasons.
Modern characters hesitate out of deep fear: Benedick’s witty resistance to marriage in Much Ado About Nothing is playful; his modern counterparts are terrified, seeing marriage as a trap or a leap into the unknown.

2. Themes

A. The Decline of Romantic Confidence

Stevenson suggests that Shakespeare’s era had a lighter, more fatalistic view of marriage. Characters like Benedick or Biron (from Love’s Labour’s Lost) resist love as a game, but their resistance is performative—they expect to marry eventually. In contrast, modern characters (like Arthur in Maître Guerin) treat marriage as something to be endured with chloroform, akin to surgery or death.

Shakespearean marriage as comedy: The hesitation is part of the joke (e.g., Benedick’s "I will live a bachelor" is undermined by his immediate attraction to Beatrice).
Modern marriage as tragedy: The tone shifts to dread—Arthur’s quip about chloroform frames marriage as something requiring anesthesia, implying pain and loss of agency.

B. Marriage as a "Leap into the Dark"

Stevenson uses vivid metaphors to describe modern fears:

"The shadow of matrimony waits, resolute and awful, at the cross-roads" → Marriage is an inescapable, looming fate, like a spectral figure.
"A great Perhaps" → Borrowed from Hamlet’s "undiscovered country" (death), marriage becomes an unknown terror, not a joyful union.
Maxime de Trailles’ despair → Each marriage of his peers is like "another gray hair", a reminder of aging and lost freedom.

This reflects the Victorian crisis of individualism: as traditional structures (religion, community) weaken, marriage feels less like a social bond and more like a personal gamble.

C. Cynicism vs. Idealism

Shakespeare’s cynics (Jacques, the Fool) are exceptions: Their bachelorhood stems from personal wounds (broken hearts, misanthropy), not a rejection of the institution itself.
Modern cynics are systemic: Their skepticism is cultural, rooted in a "spirit of incredulity"—a loss of faith in marriage as a meaningful or happy state.

Stevenson implies that romantic disillusionment is a modern phenomenon, tied to urbanization, secularization, and the rise of individualism.

3. Literary Devices

A. Juxtaposition and Contrast

Shakespearean vs. modern attitudes: Stevenson structures the excerpt around binary oppositions—lighthearted vs. despairing, communal vs. individualistic, comedic vs. tragic.
Falstaff as the exception: The only Shakespearean character who truly resists marriage (Falstaff is a hedonist who mocks domesticity), highlighting how rare this was in earlier literature.

B. Allusion and Intertextuality

Shakespearean references: Benedick (Much Ado), Biron (Love’s Labour’s Lost), Iago (Othello), Jacques (As You Like It), and the Fool (King Lear) ground the argument in literary tradition.
George Sand’s As You Like It: Stevenson critiques Sand’s adaptation (where Jacques marries Celia) to show how even melancholic characters were expected to conform to marital norms in earlier eras.
Panurge (Gargantua and Pantagruel): Rabelais’ character famously debates whether to marry, but his hesitation is satirical and exaggerated—unlike the genuine terror of modern figures.

C. Metaphor and Simile

Marriage as death: The comparison to chloroform and gray hairs frames marriage as a loss of vitality.
"Gins and pitfalls" → Marriage is a trap, reinforcing the idea of it as a perilous choice.
"Jolly church bells" → Ironically cheerful, taunting the bachelor (Maxime) with his exclusion from youthful joy.

D. Tone and Irony

Wry, conversational tone: Stevenson’s prose is engaging and sarcastic, mimicking the voice of a worldly observer.
Irony in modern attitudes: The fact that characters like Arthur joke about chloroform underscores how seriously they take the "threat" of marriage.

4. Significance

A. Cultural Critique

Stevenson’s essay captures the Victorian tension between tradition and modernity. The fear of marriage reflects broader anxieties about:

The decline of arranged marriages (and the rise of "love matches," which feel riskier).
Women’s changing roles (the New Woman movement made marriage seem less inevitable for men).
Urban alienation (in cities, marriage was no longer a community affair but a private contract).

B. Psychological Depth

The excerpt anticipates modernist themes of existential dread. The idea of marriage as a "leap into the dark" foreshadows later writers like Kafka or Camus, where life’s major choices are absurd and terrifying.

C. Literary Influence

Stevenson’s observations influenced later writers exploring romantic skepticism, such as:

Oscar Wilde (The Importance of Being Earnest mocks Victorian marital anxieties).
Henry James (whose characters often fear marriage as a loss of freedom).
D.H. Lawrence (who critiqued the institutionalization of love).

5. Close Reading of Key Passages

A. "They know they are only human after all..."

Meaning: Modern men recognize their vulnerability—they are not heroic like Shakespearean lovers but flawed and fearful.
Effect: Humanizes the terror; it’s not just cynicism but self-awareness of weakness.

B. "Every marriage was like another gray hair on his head..."

Meaning: Maxime’s reaction is visceral and aging—marriage isn’t just a personal choice but a reminder of mortality.
Effect: Links marriage to time’s passage, making bachelorhood a defiant (but doomed) resistance to aging.

C. "God’s will be done!"

Meaning: A resigned, almost religious submission—if freedom is impossible, marriage is an inevitable fate.
Effect: Echoes biblical fatalism, contrasting with Shakespearean playfulness.

Conclusion: Why This Matters

Stevenson’s excerpt is a sharp, witty diagnosis of how marriage shifted from a social expectation to a personal crisis. His blend of literary analysis, cultural observation, and psychological insight makes the essay enduringly relevant. Today, his ideas resonate in discussions about:

Delaying marriage (the rise of "failure to launch" narratives).
The "marriage strike" (men opting out due to economic or ideological fears).
Romantic pessimism in media (e.g., Marriage Story, Fleabag).

Ultimately, Stevenson argues that modern love is haunted by doubt—not because marriage is worse, but because we expect more from it (and from ourselves) than ever before. The excerpt’s power lies in its ironic lament: we’ve gained freedom but lost confidence, turning what was once a comedy into a tragedy of hesitation.

Questions

Question 1

The passage’s comparison of Shakespearean and modern attitudes toward marriage primarily serves to:

A. illustrate the superior moral clarity of Shakespeare’s era, where marriage was universally embraced as a sacred duty.
B. argue that modern literature lacks the depth of character development found in Shakespearean comedy.
C. highlight a cultural shift from fatalistic acceptance to existential dread in the face of life-altering commitments.
D. suggest that Shakespeare’s characters were more emotionally immature than their 19th-century counterparts.
E. demonstrate that the fear of marriage is a timeless human condition, equally prevalent in both eras.

Question 2

The reference to Arthur’s remark—“I should take chloroform”—is most effectively interpreted as:

A. a literal suggestion that marriage is so painful it requires medical anesthesia to endure.
B. a flippant dismissal of marriage as a trivial concern, underscoring the frivolity of modern youth.
C. a darkly humorous metaphor revealing the extent to which marriage is perceived as a traumatic, consciousness-altering ordeal.
D. an allusion to the medical advancements of the 19th century, which made pain management a central cultural preoccupation.
E. a critique of the cowardice of modern men, who lack the stoicism to face marriage without chemical aid.

Question 3

Stevenson’s inclusion of Maxime de Trailles’ reaction—“c’est désespérant, nous nous marions tous!”—primarily functions to:

A. provide a comedic counterpoint to the passage’s otherwise somber tone, lightening the mood with absurdity.
B. embody the modern perspective in which marriage is not just feared individually but mourned as a collective surrender to inevitability.
C. illustrate the hypocrisy of aging bachelors who secretly envy the stability of their married peers.
D. contrast the French and English attitudes toward marriage, suggesting the former is more resigned and less resistant.
E. underscore the economic anxieties of the 19th century, where marriage was increasingly seen as a financial burden.

Question 4

The passage’s assertion that “there seems to have been much less hesitation over marriage in Shakespeare’s days” is most strongly supported by which of the following textual details?

A. The fact that even Iago, a villain, was married, proving that marriage was a universal expectation regardless of moral character.
B. The observation that modern characters like Benedick’s descendants are “twice as much in earnest, and not one quarter so confident.”
C. The claim that hesitation in Shakespeare’s time was “of a laughing sort,” implying a lack of deep-seated existential fear.
D. The example of Jacques marrying Celia in George Sand’s adaptation, showing that even cynics were expected to conform.
E. The description of Falstaff as the “single exception,” reinforcing that avoidance of marriage was statistically rare.

Question 5

Which of the following best describes the relationship between the passage’s tone and its central argument?

A. The tone is nostalgic and wistful, idealizing Shakespeare’s era while implicitly condemning modern skepticism as a moral failing.
B. The tone is clinical and detached, presenting the shift in attitudes as an inevitable sociological progression without judgment.
C. The tone is satirical and mocking, ridiculed both Shakespearean naivety and modern paranoia with equal disdain.
D. The tone is elegiac and mournful, lamenting the loss of romantic idealism without offering a clear alternative.
E. The tone is wry and observant, blending humor with sharp critique to expose the absurdity and pathos of modern marital anxieties.

Solutions and Explanations

1) Correct answer: C

Why C is most correct: The passage explicitly contrasts Shakespearean characters’ lighthearted or resigned acceptance of marriage with modern characters’ profound terror of it as a "leap into the dark" and a "great Perhaps." Stevenson frames this as a cultural shift—from seeing marriage as an inevitable, even comedic, part of life to viewing it as an existential threat. This aligns with C’s emphasis on the transition from fatalism to dread.